The first – and potentially only – debate between the 45th and 46th presidents of the US constituted a clear win for former US president Donald Trump, as far more viewers focused on President Joe Biden’s apparent physical and mental infirmities than Trump’s evasions and trafficking in partial or outright lies. The question now is what, if any, difference it would make in the presidential election that is now just four months away.
The debate most likely increases the odds that Trump would occupy the Oval Office come noon on Jan. 20 next year. Going into the debate on Thursday last week, Trump was slightly ahead in many of the national polls and, more importantly, in the half-dozen “swing” states that would most likely determine the election’s outcome. The debate only added to this advantage.
The context favors Trump. This year has already proven to be a tough one for incumbents seeking re-election, as outcomes in India and France have demonstrated (with the UK going to the polls yesterday). Polls also show a low approval rating for the prime ministers of Japan and Canada, which could lead to a change of leadership in those countries. Biden and the US are poised to be consistent with this trend.
Like many of his fellow incumbents, Biden has struggled to manage rising immigration and economic challenges. His failure to deal effectively with the southern border has allowed about 10 million men, women and children to enter the US illegally.
Then there are the effects of inflation, something voters are reminded of every time they go to the grocery store or fill their car with gasoline. Biden can point to domestic and foreign-policy accomplishments, but they are less salient to many Americans.
Most critical is the question of his age. Doubts are widely and deeply held that Biden is simply too old for what is arguably the world’s most demanding and important job. He is 81, turns 82 in November, and, if re-elected, would turn 86 while still in the White House. He is also an old 81. As the debate demonstrated, he walks stiffly, loses his train of thought, and has a weak and raspy voice. Trump is only three years younger and makes little sense when he speaks, often taking bizarre rhetorical detours, but manages to project a more vigorous image.
Given Biden’s better outing at a campaign stop the day after the debate, some believe he can bounce back. After all, former US presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama recovered from poor debate performances. However, that was because they were seen as great orators who simply had a bad night. Biden’s problem is that his poor showing reinforced an already-entrenched narrative that would be difficult, if not impossible, to alter. His performance could even threaten to turn him into something of a lame duck, further weakening his influence at home and abroad.
All this said, Biden would be the Democratic Party candidate chosen at the party’s convention in August unless he takes himself out of the running and frees his pledged delegates to vote for someone else. Who this “someone” would be — Vice President Kamala Harris, a sitting governor or senator, a member of his Cabinet – is anybody’s guess.
It is obvious that Biden and his inner circle are resisting calls (including from sympathetic editors at major news outlets) for him to step aside. Neither he nor his loyal lieutenants, many of whom have been close to him for decades, have given any indication that the president would bow out.
Biden’s declining political fortunes could well prove to be a drag on other Democratic candidates come autumn. It is possible that a Trump victory could help bring about a Republican takeover of the Senate at the same time Republicans hold the House of Representatives. Together with a US Supreme Court that has increasingly demonstrated sympathy for positions supported by Trump and congressional Republicans, this would bring about the US equivalent of a parliamentary system, with power consolidated in the hands of a party that is better understood as radical rather than conservative.
There would be few checks on power strong enough to mitigate this imbalance; on the contrary, Trump’s plans to weaken the independence of the civil service, together with his promise to politicize the US Department of Justice and regulatory agencies, would concentrate power further. Trump would be free to lower taxes, impose tariffs, further restrict access to abortion, ease already loose controls on gun ownership, enforce immigration law as he sees fit and increase the enormous debt.
Foreign policy would also be vulnerable to significant change, because the US political system gives broad latitude to the executive. It is quite possible that Trump would reduce or even eliminate US support for Ukraine, hollow out US commitments to NATO, give Israel an even freer hand to prosecute war in Gaza and Lebanon, and build settlements, refuse to participate in global efforts to combat climate change and prioritize bilateral trade issues with China over broader concerns with Beijing’s behavior abroad.
Elections have consequences, and this one more than most, given that the differences between the candidates far exceed any similarities. In the wake of a debate that appears to have tipped the scales against Biden, and with no way of knowing if someone else would be the Democratic candidate and how he or she would fare, US friends and allies should prepare themselves for potentially major changes come January.
Richard Haass, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, is a senior counselor at Centerview Partners and the author of The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens and the weekly newsletter Home & Away.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
In competitive sports, the narrative surrounding transgender athletes is often clouded by misconceptions and prejudices. Critics sometimes accuse transgender athletes of “gaming the system” to gain an unfair advantage, perpetuating the stereotype that their participation undermines the integrity of competition. However, this perspective not only ignores the rigorous efforts transgender athletes invest to meet eligibility standards, but also devalues their personal and athletic achievements. Understanding the gap between these stereotypes and the reality of individual efforts requires a deeper examination of societal bias and the challenges transgender athletes face. One of the most pervasive arguments against the inclusion of transgender athletes
When viewing Taiwan’s political chaos, I often think of several lines from Incantation, a poem by the winner of the 1980 Nobel Prize in Literature, Czeslaw Milosz: “Beautiful and very young are Philo-Sophia, and poetry, her ally in the service of the good... Their friendship will be glorious, their time has no limit, their enemies have delivered themselves to destruction.” Milosz wrote Incantation when he was a professor of Slavic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He firmly believed that Poland would rise again under a restored democracy and liberal order. As one of several self-exiled or expelled poets from
Taiwan faces complex challenges like other Asia-Pacific nations, including demographic decline, income inequality and climate change. In fact, its challenges might be even more pressing. The nation struggles with rising income inequality, declining birthrates and soaring housing costs while simultaneously navigating intensifying global competition among major powers. To remain competitive in the global talent market, Taiwan has been working to create a more welcoming environment and legal framework for foreign professionals. One of the most significant steps in this direction was the enactment of the Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals (外國專業人才延攬及僱用法) in 2018. Subsequent amendments in
RSS